Sorry to burst your bubble, you guys who are so certain; it is XS458 :-

(C) F.Barnet-Jones

According to my records, 458 was coded “DX” around 1984, in fact the above photo shows what appears to be a “Y” made from a modified “X”. XS456 was also coded DX at one stage too though but the same codes were applied to various aircraft at different times. Traces of the star would have doubtless been removed very quickly as dayglow paint was never very tenacious!

If anyone’s interested, my new Lightning book (published by Ian Allan) is now on sale (no I’m not on commission!). Nothing Earth-shattering, but a decent read – I hope! The guy selling the photographs did contact me when I was writing the book and offered me his collection. I never got to the stage of asking him how much he wanted for the collection and probably just as well – I would have had to get the book published four times over to pay for that lot! Good luck to the guy and all that, but it’s no wonder that it’s increasingly difficult to produce decent books on historical subjects – all the old manufacturer’s photos are slowly disappearing (most have already gone!)and when you have to pay huge sums of money to buy-up any that are left (and when you get paid peanuts for putting a book together), you can see how we authors are on a hiding to nothing!

It would be a tad pointless to argue about who has said what and where. It would achieve nothing. As I said before, if you seriously think that the majority of enthusiasts and public were in any way satisfied with this year’s show, then I do seriously urge you to look around and talk to more people. I’m not suggesting that there was a small proportion of disappointed people – it would appear that the majority of show-goers thought it was, in short, a complete “rip-off” and an astonishing number of people are already saying that they will not be going next year.

But don’t take my word for it – you’re free to make your own judgements of course, however I would suggest you seek some wider sources of feedback before concluding that people were in any way happy with the show.

Oh well, hate to say I told you so but Waddington’s non-event turned-out just as bad as predicted. From what I’ve seen on the various sites, almost everybody who went thought it was a waste of money. I’m just glad I restrcted myself to Thursday and saw 558 display, and ignored the rest of the festivities.

Point is, as I’ve said before, moaning is fine but ultimately it achieves nothing. Is there anything that we can actually do to make things better for next time?

Oh dear, I should have guessed that we’d drift into point scoring. Heaven forbid we had an interesting exchange of views without getting childish.

Okay XF828, strangely enough I don’t need to be told about the Waddington show having seen it for myself, but thanks for your brilliant and pointless input. Strange how you also obsess about some claim you seem to think I’ve made to have served in the RAF even though no such claim was ever made – perhaps you could catch-up on your reading skills rather than wasting time on ill-founded sarcasm?

Speaking of sarcasm, Kev 35 that’s a wonderful piece of childish sniping. I trust that you don’t seriously believe that I’d have even the slightest interest in taking uncluttered photographs of Waddington’s static exhibits? That’s the funniest idea I’ve heard in a long time, as if there’s anything in that line-up that I (and most of us) haven’t seen more times than we care to remember.

Oh well, thanks to the guys who bothered to make some good arguments and points, but as usual, I can see we’re going nowhere now. If any of you guys who have some brain cells want to discuss anything, do please contact me by PM – it’ll save me having to bother reading any further sneering comments on this thread. Enjoy.

If the criticism here is that the RAF’s premier air show (Waddington) is lacking RAF assents then just look at the list of aircraft that are down to attend?

No, that isn’t the criticism, it’s the notion that simply claiming that an aircraft is “attending” implies that its presence is even worthwhile. Stuck behind barriers, hot dog stands and tents, it’s questionable whether the plastic replicas serve a better purpose. If static exhibits behind a barrier is all that one wants, a trip to Hendon would be a better idea surely? Dull gaggles of cluttered static aircraft don’t quite tally with the term “air show”…

The lack of RAF flying is nothing to do with the airshow office… They don’t choose what flies and what doesn’t… The MOD does that long before the aircraft appear on Waddington’s web site (surely you guys who are criticising the airshow office know this already?).

Yes, yes and yes! Point is, unless people like Waddington go back to the MoD/RAF and start saying that the show isn’t serving any useful purpose, how will things ever change? Assuming that they’d even want anything to change, that is.

I read comments with disbelief too. It’s easy to take bits of a sentence out of context but if anyone is serious about this subject, they’ll read everything I’ve said and realise that even if you don’t agree with me, I’m making some very valid points. But if you’d rather pursue the same old cliches and the same old misconceptions then so be it. If you seriously think that Waddington’s show is the best that the RAF could offer in terms of attracting recruits (and I mean serious ones, not kids with a whim) and seriously promoting RAF PR and seriously staging a real “showcase” then I’m truly surprised! I can at least be sure than a seriously large number of people agree with me that it’s far from achievening that aim. But each to his own I guess. Enjoy your day out!

PS I never said I had served in the RAF – again, I suggest you actually read what I’ve said before dismissing it. In some respects we’d have a much more useful debate if people would give the subject some serious thought before issuing the same old responses. It really is this simple – you either think the present show is worthwhile or you don’t. My point is that an increasing number of people don’t and surely that isn’t a healthy situation and it is therefore one which should be addressed, not simply dismissed.

Let’s keep things polite Bloodnok. Suffice to say you’re completely off-track if you think I’ve had nothing to do with aircraft and/or the RAF. However I’m prompted to add if that really is your attitude to shifting one week’s work to a weekend to show your Air Force to the public, then maybe you’re in the wrong job!

Anyway, if we’re going to conduct a sensible discssion here, then let’s proceed. I don’t accept that I’m being “hard” on organisers at all. I think this is part of the problem. We’ve developed this notion that the show organisers are somehow beyond reproach but for no good reason. As I’ve said, they are there to organise an event for which we pay – simple as that. Okay, we can do all the usual disclaimers about accepting the realities of the RAF’s current predicament, costs, safety, logistics and all the rest but this gets us nowhere. Point is, no matter how you look at it, people are drifting away from air shows because they’re not as entertaining as they were. We know why, but to simply say “the organisers do their best” is rather pointless. Surely, there’s a case for looking at ways to do things more effectively?

As for your point VX927 well that’s fair enough – you have your view but I don’t share it. I don’t imagine for a minute that kids watching the Brietling Team or sitting in a plastic replica is going to inspire them to join the RAF even for a minute. As somebody said somewhere only a few days ago, I think it’s easy to underestimate people’s intelligence. Nobody with any interest in military aircraft is going to be “bought off” by civilian acts. The civvy stuff amuses the wider public and that’s all.

The way I see it, the conventional air show format is certainly good for attracting the general public and for raising money. If that’s what Waddington wants out of the show then fine, good luck to them of course. But the show was (is?) supposedly the RAF’s “showcase event” and quite how it achieves this aim I really can’t see. Okay, I accept that a great deal is beyond the organiser’s control but surely this suggests that they should be making a case to their superiors to look at the show differently? It’s easy to say that they are constrained by rules and constraints but one is prompted to say that maybe the rules should be changed then?

As for not liking the idea of seeing aircraft take-off, land, overshoot, taxy or whatever, well again I guess that’s down to personal taste but I suspect that a potential recruit would much rather see that kind of activity than a bunch of aircraft stuck behind barriers and tents, and a collection of civilian flying demonstrations. I know for certain that most enthusiasts would. But the fundamental point is that Waddington is supposed to be the RAF’s show and yet it’s increasingly looking like a distinctly civilian “air fete” which merely includes the usual RAF “star acts” and little more. Surely, when the show has reached this stage, there’s a case for asking whether things can’t be done in a very different way?

As I say, I’m sure little will change while the crowds keep coming. I have no problems with that – I hope everyone has a good time and the show raises lots of money. But where is the RAF’s “showcase event”, where is the PR, where is the recruiting attraction? It’s gone, and unless someone tries to do something different it ain’t gonna be coming back.